INS mistakenly doles out visas

“The federal immigration service mistakenly doled out as many as 20,000 visas to foreigners with high-tech skills during the just-ended fiscal year, prompting angry complaints from Congress”, according to a story from the Associated Press.

“Immigration and Naturalization Service managers notified lawmakers last week that, because of a computer system miscommunication, they had exceeded the congressionally imposed cap of 115,000 H-1B visas for the year ended Sept. 30 by 10,000 to 20,000.

“The mistake is the ‘latest self-inflicted wound by the agency’s inept management,’ Rep. Lamar Smith, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee’s immigration panel, said Tuesday.

“Little wonder there is such momentum behind the House’s bipartisan legislation to split the INS into two simpler agencies,” said the Texas Republican. He is pushing a plan to replace INS with separate service and immigration enforcement agencies.

INS is contracting with an independent auditor to determine exactly how many extra visas were issued, agency spokeswoman Maria Cardona said Tuesday. The error occurred when visa approval numbers from the four INS service centers that process H-1B applications didn’t get into the agency’s main computer system in Washington that tracks totals, she said.

“They can blame system errors or the computer. They can blame anything they want, but ultimately this is an agency that cannot count,” said Smith spokesman Allen Kay.

Imagine the screw-ups this highly inefficient federal agency would render when given legal control of immigration in the CNMI. I mean, if it can’t count legally permitted number of foreign workers with high-tech skills, imagine if under the rush in dealing with the Chinese boat people they end up encouraging others to flee to the islands. And they have the audacity to say they can effectively control of our borders?

“I want to make a difference”

It’s a common phrase being trumpeted by political aspirants of various stripes out on the campaign trail. If anything, it’s something refreshing though hardly anyone was able to articulate a single issue with clarity. Most of what was said about “making a difference” revolved around an incoherent discussion of the Earned Income Credit (EIC), education, health and the economy. I have yet to hear any of the candidates articulate a single issue with clarity of understanding. I was rather disappointed.

If such is the caliber of candidates who deserve an “A” for bravery, most are likely to spend the next two years figuring out the back door of both chambers wearing a temporary aura of self-importance as they carry empty Manila folders to restrooms and colleagues’ offices. Furthermore, I quiz whether these candidates are wary that their primary role is one of policymaking and that such responsibility requires the ability to see the forest over the trees?

But then again, I may be a bit critical without the benefit of meeting the beast. I look forward to the results of the Nov. 6th midterm election where the ultimate victors shall emerge and villains relegated to several more years of soul-searching. Next week, I will predict the likely outcome of the election. After the election, there would be other substantive issues we expect to descend from the US Supreme Court both of which are likely to force realignment in the composition of the local Senate and the complete trashing of the Article 12 provision in the Covenant. Be good and be open minded as you sift which among candidates can in fact “make a difference”.